PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Court case dismissed- victim's right to request a review
ena1m
post Wed, 6 Dec 2017 - 21:02
Post #1


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 3 Jul 2011
Member No.: 47,971



I am not sure if this is the right place for some advice on this matter but here it is: At the end of April my husband and I were the victims of an accident where a driver did not respect the right of way at a junction and hit us full on without even trying to break.
We had reached the junction and stood behind another car while the light was red, we had then moved on once it turned green. We understand though, by witnesses, that the traffic light may have switched off as we were crossing the junction, so the light was either red or switched off for the driver the hit us. He was coming from our left on a road that has a 40 miles per hour speed limit while we were on a 20 miles per hour going towards a 30 miles per hour. I am sure that had we been hit a second later I would not be here to tell the tale. A fractured sternum and ribs, nightmares and becoming an anxious driver and passenger for me, massive bruising for both of us and my car completely destroyed were the result.
The police decided to prosecute the driver of the other car for driving without due care. The charge seemed too lenient for me as the guy was driving over the speed limit (something that should have come up by the amount of damage caused to the cars), the fact that he didn't give right of way (we were coming from his right) and he did not break (besides what I saw there were no markings on the tarmac) and he had to have seen both the car that went before us and ourselves.
The Court case was due on the 18th of this month but out of the blue the Court has decided to drop the charge as they are in doubt over the colour of the traffic light, meaning, some of the witnesses saw the traffic lights either green or red depending on the direction they were coming from and some saw it switched off. I can ask the Court to reconsider its decision and this is where I could use some help please. Is there any point of law that I can use in my request for a review?
Thank you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 18)
Advertisement
post Wed, 6 Dec 2017 - 21:02
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
Jlc
post Wed, 6 Dec 2017 - 21:18
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,845
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
From: With Mickey
Member No.: 49,223



One presumes it's the CPS that have decided that there is conflicting evidence and has failed to meet the necessary standard to continue (The Evidential Stage).

You would have to contact the CPS - they would advise accordingly particularly around 'The Victims' Right to Review'.

This post has been edited by Jlc: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 - 21:42


--------------------
RK=Registered Keeper, OP=Original Poster (You!), CoFP=Conditional Offer of Fixed Penalty, NtK=Notice to Keeper, NtD=Notice to Driver
PoFA=Protection of Freedoms Act, SAC=Safety Awareness Course, NIP=Notice of Intended Prosecution, ADR=Alternative Dispute Resolution
PPC=Private Parking Company, LBCCC=Letter Before County Court Claim, PII=Personally Identifiable Information

Private Parking - remember, they just want your money and will say almost anything to get it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Wed, 6 Dec 2017 - 21:23
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,576
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



If the court has made the decision then you have no right to a review. If the CPS has made the decision then you do but it sounds like the case no longer meets the evidential test (reasonable prospect of conviction). It is quite right to halt it at that point if that is the case.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ena1m
post Wed, 6 Dec 2017 - 23:25
Post #4


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 3 Jul 2011
Member No.: 47,971



We received a letter from the CPS to inform us of their decision and that as victims we can ask for a review. I have spoken to the Court and I was given the mixed witness statements as the reason for the decision (some witnesses saw the green lights and the red lights in the correct traffic lights but as the power went down some other witnesses, in oncoming traffic, saw the lights were off. The only person that may be claiming something different is the guilty chap) but whether the light was working or not the driver that hit us did so by ignoring the rules of the road.
He used his car as a weapon and his actions are still causing us a lot of pain. Why did he not try to break? Who wouldn't do that? By the way in the first few days after the accident the guy tried to claim for injuries through a solicitors adducing we were at fault. The claim was dropped as the police gathered evidence to the contrary and in fact the police decided he should be prosecuted. Our thought was that he was after cash for crash. That is why I will appreciate if anyone can share any point of law that can help me formulate my request.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Wed, 6 Dec 2017 - 23:57
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,605
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



This is nothing to do with the court, it's a CPS decision. It's going to be quite difficult to give specific advice because really we'd need to see all the statements and the CPS's letter in order to criticise their decision, but you can't post any of that on a public forum as it may undermine the right of the defendant to a fair trial.

However the victim's right to review scheme does not require any legal expertise and it is meant to be accessible to people who are not legally trained, so I'm not sure you need specific advice on points of law. If you ask for a review a senior prosecutor should look at all the evidence and make a fresh assessment of the evidence. Unfortunately if they decide the prosecution should not go ahead, as long as they follow the correct decision making process, you have no recourse.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fedup2
post Thu, 7 Dec 2017 - 00:16
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,343
Joined: 27 Feb 2007
Member No.: 10,873



QUOTE (ena1m @ Wed, 6 Dec 2017 - 21:02) *
I am not sure if this is the right place for some advice on this matter but here it is: At the end of April my husband and I were the victims of an accident where a driver did not respect the right of way at a junction and hit us full on without even trying to break.
We had reached the junction and stood behind another car while the light was red, we had then moved on once it turned green. We understand though, by witnesses, that the traffic light may have switched off as we were crossing the junction, so the light was either red or switched off for the driver the hit us. He was coming from our left on a road that has a 40 miles per hour speed limit while we were on a 20 miles per hour going towards a 30 miles per hour. I am sure that had we been hit a second later I would not be here to tell the tale. A fractured sternum and ribs, nightmares and becoming an anxious driver and passenger for me, massive bruising for both of us and my car completely destroyed were the result.
The police decided to prosecute the driver of the other car for driving without due care. The charge seemed too lenient for me as the guy was driving over the speed limit (something that should have come up by the amount of damage caused to the cars), the fact that he didn't give right of way (we were coming from his right) and he did not break (besides what I saw there were no markings on the tarmac) and he had to have seen both the car that went before us and ourselves.
The Court case was due on the 18th of this month but out of the blue the Court has decided to drop the charge as they are in doubt over the colour of the traffic light, meaning, some of the witnesses saw the traffic lights either green or red depending on the direction they were coming from and some saw it switched off. I can ask the Court to reconsider its decision and this is where I could use some help please. Is there any point of law that I can use in my request for a review?
Thank you.


My posts here are sometimes from a completely different angle and not always welcome,but if i can say that your post seems to be full of anger, wanting revenge and assumptions.
You insinuate that the other driver made no attempt to avoid the serious situation by not braking.What proof do you have for that? Cars have a whole load of electric goodies nowadays to prevent locking up (few skid marks) and many still have the automatic driver reaction to a lock up that over rides the ABS,which is when a lock up is felt the brake is released and instantly reapplied giving similar results.Neither one is illegal.
Then there is the speeding,is that what the police concluded in their reports,or your gut feeling? It sounds like he had permission to be doing twice the speed you were if ive read it right.
What ifs really have no place in a court room,they are mostly,judged on facts that occurred not might have beens. If that were the case we would need many more courts.Stuff like that does make cracking headlines though.

Then theres the colour of the lights which the police seem to have much doubt about from the evidence they have.If they haven't got a solid answer what colour they were on,then rightly the case should be dropped.While the law in this country has its quirks,i keep my fingers crossed that the only people convicted are the ones properly proved they were guilty.In this case the police seem to have doubt.They could do no other and other than the evidence changing i can see no change in moving the way you believe it should.
One last tip,A green light is no more than permission to go,it does not in anyway shape or form,indicate it is SAFE to go.








Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Thu, 7 Dec 2017 - 08:49
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,576
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



Whilst a criminal trial may not proceed you could always sue in the civil courts.


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Churchmouse
post Thu, 7 Dec 2017 - 20:12
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,875
Joined: 30 Jun 2008
From: Landan
Member No.: 20,731



QUOTE (fedup2 @ Thu, 7 Dec 2017 - 00:16) *
QUOTE (ena1m @ Wed, 6 Dec 2017 - 21:02) *
I am not sure if this is the right place for some advice on this matter but here it is: At the end of April my husband and I were the victims of an accident where a driver did not respect the right of way at a junction and hit us full on without even trying to break.
We had reached the junction and stood behind another car while the light was red, we had then moved on once it turned green. We understand though, by witnesses, that the traffic light may have switched off as we were crossing the junction, so the light was either red or switched off for the driver the hit us. He was coming from our left on a road that has a 40 miles per hour speed limit while we were on a 20 miles per hour going towards a 30 miles per hour. I am sure that had we been hit a second later I would not be here to tell the tale. A fractured sternum and ribs, nightmares and becoming an anxious driver and passenger for me, massive bruising for both of us and my car completely destroyed were the result.
The police decided to prosecute the driver of the other car for driving without due care. The charge seemed too lenient for me as the guy was driving over the speed limit (something that should have come up by the amount of damage caused to the cars), the fact that he didn't give right of way (we were coming from his right) and he did not break (besides what I saw there were no markings on the tarmac) and he had to have seen both the car that went before us and ourselves.
The Court case was due on the 18th of this month but out of the blue the Court has decided to drop the charge as they are in doubt over the colour of the traffic light, meaning, some of the witnesses saw the traffic lights either green or red depending on the direction they were coming from and some saw it switched off. I can ask the Court to reconsider its decision and this is where I could use some help please. Is there any point of law that I can use in my request for a review?
Thank you.


My posts here are sometimes from a completely different angle and not always welcome,but if i can say that your post seems to be full of anger, wanting revenge and assumptions.
You insinuate that the other driver made no attempt to avoid the serious situation by not braking.What proof do you have for that? Cars have a whole load of electric goodies nowadays to prevent locking up (few skid marks) and many still have the automatic driver reaction to a lock up that over rides the ABS,which is when a lock up is felt the brake is released and instantly reapplied giving similar results.Neither one is illegal.
Then there is the speeding,is that what the police concluded in their reports,or your gut feeling? It sounds like he had permission to be doing twice the speed you were if ive read it right.
What ifs really have no place in a court room,they are mostly,judged on facts that occurred not might have beens. If that were the case we would need many more courts.Stuff like that does make cracking headlines though.

Then theres the colour of the lights which the police seem to have much doubt about from the evidence they have.If they haven't got a solid answer what colour they were on,then rightly the case should be dropped.While the law in this country has its quirks,i keep my fingers crossed that the only people convicted are the ones properly proved they were guilty.In this case the police seem to have doubt.They could do no other and other than the evidence changing i can see no change in moving the way you believe it should.
One last tip,A green light is no more than permission to go,it does not in anyway shape or form,indicate it is SAFE to go.

The OP could try arguing that the condition of the traffic lights is not what made the other driver's actions unlawful. Even if the traffic lights were not functioning, drivers cannot drive through intersections that are already occupied by other vehicles. Maybe the easy win was lost through the weakness of the evidence regarding the colour of the traffic lights, but this case still sounds to me like the kind of case the CPS should be pursuing. Good luck.

--Churchmouse
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 00:03
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,366
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Thu, 7 Dec 2017 - 20:12) *
..........The OP could try arguing that the condition of the traffic lights is not what made the other driver's actions unlawful. Even if the traffic lights were not functioning, drivers cannot drive through intersections that are already occupied by other vehicles. Maybe the easy win was lost through the weakness of the evidence regarding the colour of the traffic lights, but this case still sounds to me like the kind of case the CPS should be pursuing. Good luck.

--Churchmouse


It's six of one and half a dozen of another.
Did one driver keep driving despite another crossing
Or did the crossing driver enter a junction without checking leaving the other vehicle no chance to stop.

Without witnesses who can agree on the most basic like state of lights, I cannot see a successful prosecution or civil claim.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 10:37
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,605
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 00:03) *
Without witnesses who can agree on the most basic like state of lights, I cannot see a successful prosecution or civil claim.

Except that in a civil case, a judge can make a finding of fact based on the balance big probabilities, and in any event the insurance companies (or if need be the MiB) will pay any damages awarded. Given that in a case such as this the claimants would benefit from QOCS, a civil claim would seem a sensible course of action.

In a criminal case, guilt must be proven beyond reasonable doubt, i.e. the prosecution has to show that there's no reasonable explanation that is consistent with innocence.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 10:52
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,366
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (cp8759 @ Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 10:37) *
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 00:03) *
Without witnesses who can agree on the most basic like state of lights, I cannot see a successful prosecution or civil claim.

Except that in a civil case, a judge can make a finding of fact based on the balance big probabilities, and in any event the insurance companies (or if need be the MiB) will pay any damages awarded. Given that in a case such as this the claimants would benefit from QOCS, a civil claim would seem a sensible course of action.

In a criminal case, guilt must be proven beyond reasonable doubt, i.e. the prosecution has to show that there's no reasonable explanation that is consistent with innocence.


I understand exactly what you are saying but what is the judge in a civil case going to base it on?
One driver saying I pulled into the junction on green and this other car appeared out of nowhere crossing on red versus I was driving along, red light in front changes to green so I continued and found this other car pulling out of a junction on red.
OP even says in first post that they are not sure if lights changed as they pulled out.
Unless someone admits or an irrefutable witness appears, what does the judge do, decide on which party they prefer?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Rookie
post Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 16:28
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 39,460
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
From: Warwickshire
Member No.: 317



Apart from the fact there is no such thing as a civil prosecution, balance of probabilities means just that, if the judge believes one side by more than 50% then that is accepted as true.


--------------------
There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!

S172's
Rookies 1-0 Kent

Council PCN's
Rookies 1-0 Warwick
Rookies 1-0 Birmingham

PPC PCN's
Rookies 8-0 PPC's
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 16:42
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,605
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 10:52) *
I understand exactly what you are saying but what is the judge in a civil case going to base it on?
One driver saying I pulled into the junction on green and this other car appeared out of nowhere crossing on red versus I was driving along, red light in front changes to green so I continued and found this other car pulling out of a junction on red.
OP even says in first post that they are not sure if lights changed as they pulled out.
Unless someone admits or an irrefutable witness appears, what does the judge do, decide on which party they prefer?

The judge decides what is more likely. Is it more likely that that the light was red and the driver went through it, and the witness who says the light was off / green / whatever is mistaken, or is it more likely that the lights were not working properly?
Even so, was the driver at fault for not braking? Did they have a reasonable opportunity to brake?

These are all findings of fact which the judge makes, having heard and seen all available evidence. These are the sort of findings that judges make all the time in road traffic accidents, as well as other civil claims.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 16:55
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,605
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (The Rookie @ Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 16:28) *
Apart from the fact there is no such thing as a civil prosecution, balance of probabilities means just that, if the judge believes one side by more than 50% then that is accepted as true.

Almost, the judge may well believe that a witness is honest and stating what he or she believes to be the truth, and still find that the witness is wrong. The legal test is what version of events, taking all the evidence into account, is more than 50% likely to be true. The role of the judge is not limited to deciding which conflicting account to believe.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 20:05
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 28,576
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 10:52) *
I understand exactly what you are saying but what is the judge in a civil case going to base it on?

Well, the claim in negligence wouldn't be based solely on the other party ignoring or not noticing the red light. You would also particularise other instances of negligence such as "did not keep any, or any proper look out" and "did not take any, or any sufficient, action to avoid a collision".


--------------------


Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sat, 9 Dec 2017 - 10:25
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 19,366
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 20:05) *
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 10:52) *
I understand exactly what you are saying but what is the judge in a civil case going to base it on?

Well, the claim in negligence wouldn't be based solely on the other party ignoring or not noticing the red light. You would also particularise other instances of negligence such as "did not keep any, or any proper look out" and "did not take any, or any sufficient, action to avoid a collision".


Again, I understand.
And take on board the comments from others pointing out the balance of probabilities.
But I still take the pragmatic view.
One party will be saying lights were in my favour (I think in the case of the OP) and the other party didn't stop
And the other will be saying lights were green and the other driver pulled out in front.
Which by no means makes it cut and dried in the OP's favour.
I also have an automatic reaction whenever someone says the other driver was speeding and didn't brake..... So why did you pull out then if you saw them coming ?

I have every sympathy with them, horrendous situation but with the facts we have, 50/50 on which way a civil court would rule.
Which to me isn't a winning situation.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sat, 9 Dec 2017 - 12:20
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,605
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sat, 9 Dec 2017 - 10:25) *
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 20:05) *
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 8 Dec 2017 - 10:52) *
I understand exactly what you are saying but what is the judge in a civil case going to base it on?

Well, the claim in negligence wouldn't be based solely on the other party ignoring or not noticing the red light. You would also particularise other instances of negligence such as "did not keep any, or any proper look out" and "did not take any, or any sufficient, action to avoid a collision".


Again, I understand.
And take on board the comments from others pointing out the balance of probabilities.
But I still take the pragmatic view.
One party will be saying lights were in my favour (I think in the case of the OP) and the other party didn't stop
And the other will be saying lights were green and the other driver pulled out in front.
Which by no means makes it cut and dried in the OP's favour.
I also have an automatic reaction whenever someone says the other driver was speeding and didn't brake..... So why did you pull out then if you saw them coming ?

I have every sympathy with them, horrendous situation but with the facts we have, 50/50 on which way a civil court would rule.
Which to me isn't a winning situation.

But if they make a civil claim, they have little or nothing to lose. We already know the third party was looking at making a claim bu that was dropped once the police took the view that he should be prosecuted, so a counter-claim is unlikely. There are no risks of having to pay the defendant's costs, as the OP will benefit from qualified one-way cost shifting. The insurance companies will already know about the accident. The best course of action would be to seek advice from a reputable personal injury solicitor in the first instance.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ena1m
post Sat, 9 Dec 2017 - 23:37
Post #18


New Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 3 Jul 2011
Member No.: 47,971



Thank you to everybody for the advice given. I really appreciate, they will help me formulate my request to the Court. To answer a couple of points raised: we didn't see the car coming at us until the last three/four seconds. We are talking about a six lanes road, three lanes each way with a pedestrian island in the middle, also the road is raised at the traffic light and sloping in the direction of the car that hit us. He had full view of us but we didn't until the point we saw him. We left our traffic light when it turned green. There was another car in front of us that went off fairly quickly, we were slow, we crossed two lanes of the three lanes going west and then when we were in the third lane entering the middle of the road/pedestrian island section I saw the car coming at us travelling fast. I saw how fast it was coming and I saw it did not break. There was no way of avoiding the impact. My car was smashed, even the tyres blew and we ended up pushed in the opposite lane. While I wish that guy never crossed our path, it happened. The police gathered all the information and decided to prosecute but now the letter from the Court has came, out of the blue and it all seems so unfair.

This post has been edited by ena1m: Sat, 9 Dec 2017 - 23:46
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sun, 10 Dec 2017 - 00:00
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,605
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (ena1m @ Sat, 9 Dec 2017 - 23:37) *
Thank you to everybody for the advice given. I really appreciate, they will help me formulate my request to the Court. To answer a couple of points raised: we didn't see the car coming at us until the last three/four seconds. We are talking about a six lanes road, three lanes each way with a pedestrian island in the middle, also the road is raised at the traffic light and sloping in the direction of the car that hit us. He had full view of us but we didn't until the point we saw him. We left our traffic light when it turned green. There was another car in front of us that went off fairly quickly, we were slow, we crossed two lanes of the three lanes going west and then when we were in the third lane entering the middle of the road/pedestrian island section I saw the car coming at us travelling fast. I saw how fast it was coming and I saw it did not break. There was no way of avoiding the impact. My car was smashed, even the tyres blew and we ended up pushed in the opposite lane. While I wish that guy never crossed our path, it happened. The police gathered all the information and decided to prosecute but now the letter from the Court has came, out of the blue and it all seems so unfair.

The only viable options you have are:

Criminal proceedings: You need to stop getting the CPS and the Court mixed up. The CPS are the ones that prosecute crimes on behalf of the Crown, and it is the CPS that have decided to drop the case, this decision is nothing to do with the court. You can ask the CPS to review the decision under the victim's right to review, by all means feel free to make representations, they will have a marginal impact but the decision will mainly be based on what admissible evidence has been gathered by the police. Do not write to the court, there is nothing the court can do for you as it is not your case, you were only ever going to be a witness.

Civil proceedings: Make a personal injury claim with a reputable specialist solicitor. There are many good firms out there, http://www.jefferieslaw.co.uk is one I would recommend but of course there are many others.


--------------------
I am not on the "motorists's side", nor am I on the "police/CPS/council's" side, I am simply in favour of the rule of law.
No, I am not a lawyer.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Sunday, 23rd September 2018 - 05:28
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.